the myth that todays fat HW's are bigger and stronger

[SBleeder]

It's definitely true and why should I be mad? Where you even took it from ?
It's just as true as saying that average super bantamweight is taller than average heavyweight.
Just look at Celestino Caballero and Mike Tyson!
Mathebula and Joe Frazier for example!
You'd have to take measure tape and measure every super bantamweight and heavyweight in the world to prove me I'm wrong, right?

Well, I met Manny Pacquiao once and he stood at least nine feet tall.

[Scott9945]

Well, I met Manny Pacquiao once and he stood at least nine feet tall.

Ha! More proof that he's jacked up on roids and HGH.

[nomadman]

I've come to this thread a little late, so I may be repeating some stuff here.

Let me say that I'm not a size whore, though I still believe it plays a large factor in any fight, provided there is no outrageous skills gap and that both fighters are well conditioned and more or less comparable in athleticism and physical durability. You can find exceptions to anything, but on average a naturally larger man tends to be a stronger and more resilient man as well. Most importantly though, his size allows him to fight in a style that minimises danger to himself whilst inflicting it on others. It doesn't automatically translate to success, though it gives him certain advantages in the ring which, if used intelligently, make him very hard to beat.

In other words, it matters, but not in isolation.

This current division has seen an increase in larger (and heavier) opponents, but with the exception of the Klitschkos, there hasn't really been much of a change in the landscape. The naturally large men like Helenius, Dimitrenko, Thompson etc are not too different from the large men of the past, being slow, unathletic or lacking the skills of their smaller opponents, whilst fighters like Arreola and Solis are just plain fat (and in Arreola's case, as crude as a bar room brawler). You can make a strong case for the Klitschkos, but anyone who tries to tell me that today's division is stronger than divisions of the past "because the fighters are bigger" is naive. As the 210lb Haye showed the 247lb Chisora earlier this month, that's simply not the case.

[nomadman]

If you look at the top heavyweights from the past 8 or so years, very few are much bigger than the past era's of heavyweights. The Klitchko's and Lewis have given a false image about 'modern heavyweights' because they are rare even in this era. If you ask me the 90s heavyweights were bigger on average and they weren't as fat as some of the guys we have today.

I agree with this. Golota, Briggs, Bowe, Bruno, Ruddock, Grant etc were all very large men who fought at peak condition. Today's heavyweights tend to hover around the six foot mark and weigh in around the 240-250lb mark. That's just obese, however you spin it.

[nomadman]

David Haye blew him self up to a 210. He went 12 with Wlad and even took his best punches.

Eddie Chambers is even smaller, if he was ripped I bet he'd be 190. He was on his way to going 12 with Wlad.

So Frazier, 205 ripped (224 soft) has no chance? especially when he's exceptionally good at closing the distance against taller opponents?

The K bros are taller but they don't have bigger fists or skulls. All the weight is from height.

look at the difficulty Vitali had with chisoras poor imitation of Frazier.

Haye didn't blow himself up to 210lbs, he simply stopped cutting weight. His ring weight when he fought at cruiser was probably around 210, if not more than that. Chambers I agree could quite comfortably make CW.

This is sort of irrelevant though, because neither man came close to beating Wlad, and in Chambers's case was knocked unconscious. They're also both stylistically dissimilar to Frazier, and possessed attributes that Frazier did not possess. To draw any conclusions from the above two fights seems a bit simplistic IMO.

[nomadman]

I don't know when it actually started eroding but I agree it has tremendously. The present stack of bodies that are #1 thru #20 are the saddest group in history, even compared to the group that were fighting when Marciano retired and Patterson took over. But It is good for the smaller weight classes.

I agree, though I think at least some portion of the blame has to lie with the current boxing scene, corrupt governing bodies, over-protective promoters/managers etc. Prospects simply do not fight enough, or are spoonfed soft opposition to artificially inflate their ranking. Fighters like Povetkin nab bogus belts and avoid tough challenges, and the associations do nothing to punish them. This has a feedback effect on the boxers themselves, who feel they don't have to train as hard as they should or hone their skills to the best of their abilities.

I won't say there isn't talent in the current heavyweight scene, but it's not evenly represented by the rankings, and it's not really being realised.

[Mike Tyson77]

I love the old time heavyweights, im talkin Jack Johnson,Jack Dempsey,Rocky marciano......But these guys would really have there hands full with guys like Wlad,Vitali and Lennox. I mean you are talkin pretty much heavyweights and super heavyweights. . .

[Daddy T]

joe louis, ali, tyson - any one of the three would dominate today's (super) heavyweights and in their prime all are below 220

[nomadman]

joe louis, ali, tyson - any one of the three would dominate today's (super) heavyweights and in their prime all are below 220

Louis, no. Ali and Tyson, very possibly.